Excel Parking Services - Flipped Ticket

jam1991

Side question, what happens if the proposed court date is when you are away outside of the UK?

Coupon-mad

That's covered in the N180 DQ which bargepole tells you about, in the NEWBIES thread.

jam1991

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That's covered in the N180 DQ which bargepole tells you about, in the NEWBIS thread.

Thanks, is that an external link? I have searched the newbies thread for "N180 DQ" but cannot see anything.

Le_Kirk

jam1991 wrote: »

Thanks, is that an external link? I have searched the newbies thread for "N180 DQ" but cannot see anything.

Not an external link but is contained within post # 2 of the NEWBIE section. HERE is a link to it.

jam1991

At what stage do you advise a lay representative (family member) will be attending court with you please?

Umkomaas

jam1991 wrote: »

At what stage do you advise a lay representative (family member) will be attending court with you please?

On arrival at the court, inform the Usher and ask if they could appraise the Judge. You need to take a copy of this with you, as some Judges have been a bit 'sniffy' about LR involvement.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27/pd_part27

Also do a Google on 'McKenzie Friend', which is another element of assistance to a defendant, so you know the difference between LR and MF, in case the Judge seeks any clarification of your proposed role.

jam1991

Found the suggested template for a defence, what is the purpose of "!!!8220" & "!!!8221"?
The fact that my family member had a valid parking ticket, which flipped on the dashboard.
How do I best include this as a point within the defence?

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date in a marked bay allocated to Company XXXX at XXXX Business Park, and had a valid permit to be parked in that bay.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant; was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle(s);. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient prorpietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Le_Kirk

what is the purpose of "!!!8220" & "!!!8221"?

They were left over from a Forum glitch last year, just delete them when you clean up your defence.

jam1991

Thank you Le_Kirk

I feel I need to make the defence more applicable to the circumstances surrounding the flipped ticket.

jam1991

jam1991 wrote: »

Thank you Le_Kirk

I feel I need to make the defence more applicable to the circumstances surrounding the flipped ticket.

Is anyone available to critique my defence before submitting please?